This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Humayun Khan (soldier) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
|
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If i had started the article, i'd have taken note that equal disambiguation is the default, and there must be a showing that, in this case, the diplomat or the war hero commands more than 50% of the public interest associated with the title. My prediction is that the soldier will soon eclipse the diplomat far beyond that, but the first step, whether or not i'm right, is to do equal dab for the time being. -- Jerzy• t 03:03, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
I've removed/reduced/reworded this content as I don't see how it's relevant or encyclopedic:
Humayun's father Khizr M. Khan, an immigration lawyer, discussed his son's achievements in 2005 with the Washington Post in 2005 and with Vocativ in 2015. Khan gave the Hillary Clinton campaign permission to use his words in a tribute given in December 2015.
I've kept the supporting references (not reprinted here), but this otherwise seems like barely relevant WP:TRIVIA to me. -- Kendrick7 talk 13:55, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
How are the comments of his father relevant? There is clearly a double standard at play. If Khizr Khan's attacks on Donald Trump are relevant to an article on Humayun Khan... then Patty Smith's attacks on Hillary Clinton are relevant to the article on Sean Smith. If Khizr Khan's comments are not removed here then I will add Patty Smith's comments to the corresponding article. This would include her comments at the RNC that Hillary Clinton lied to her face and that she holds Hillary Clinton personally responsible for the death of her son. If one set of comments is fair play then so is the other. 107.0.155.16 ( talk) 16:35, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Half of the content of this article is criticism of Donald Trump. Now people are trying to insert video of Khizr Khan criticizing Trump at the DNC. This is not the appropriate place for that content. Put it in the Khizr Khan page and mention that Humayun Khan is the son of immigration lawyer Khizr Khan... and be done with it. As far as I can tell there is zero direct relationship between Donald Trump and Humayun Khan. Put the father's criticism in the page on the father and link to that page. That content is not appropriate here. 107.0.155.16 ( talk) 21:04, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
http://shoebat.com/2016/08/02/hillary-is-busted-read-the-real-booklet-hillarys-man-was-carrying-for-years-it-was-the-muslim-shariah-constitution-and-not-the-u-s-constitution/ 71.182.237.125 ( talk) 23:58, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
This is a hot topic right now, but Capt Khan's father's statement of his son rushing a VIED while checking a guard tower and saving a chow hall full of hundreds of coalition personnel from harm is likely a fabrication. No media release prior to the DNC regarding Capt. Khan's death mentions such acts [1], [2] tell a very different story. 70.158.100.102 ( talk) 16:30, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Can we get the record corrected on this matter? I find it very doubtful that an army Captain would jump from a protected watchtower equipped with a machinegun to defeat a speeding vehicle with only his personal duty weapon. Also MASH is not a credible source. It is common knowledge to not place a DFAC (or mess hall) near an entry control point of base perimeter. 173.216.3.186 ( talk) 19:06, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
I have removed this category from the article, because the established description of the category says, "This category includes articles of people who are Muslim (followers of the religion of Islam) from Pakistan." He was not "from Pakistan" but rather his parents are. He was born in the United Arab Emirates. This category is not correct for this biography in my opinion. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:18, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
The Man is only American in a national way. Jack Morales Garcia ( talk) 20:58, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
What is the earliest source we can find saying that he was a Muslim? Can we find one that existed prior to July 29? He died in June 2004 so there's 12 years worth of news reports that could have mentioned it, I'll start looking. Given that many recent reports are calling him a 'muslim soldier' it would be interesting to know where and when this information came from. For example if there are statements from the soldier himself before his death, or any official registrations with a champlain.
edit: Okay I found one from a report when he was buried about a week after death:
Clock, Michele (16 June 2004). "A 'Peacemaker' Is Laid to Rest - Muslim Soldier From Prince William Tried to Improve Relations in Iraq". Washington Post. Archived from the original on 11 August 2016.
Family members and friends -- including Khan's girlfriend, Irene Auer, 24, of Amberg, Germany -- have filled the Khans' Bristow home in the past week, weeping and praying for the Muslim soldier they will remember as helping to build a bridge between the American and Iraqi people.{{ cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) ( help)
I'm still curious if we can find any pre-death sources though. Like for example where did Clock get the information: was it from parents? girlfriend? Military officers? Knowing the context is generally a useful thing since sometimes different people can have different opinions about what a person's religious status is. Ranze ( talk) 06:15, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
I still believe I am accurate in calling that original research.I am not saying it is OR that 14 Muslim-Americans died in service, but rather, that Hillary described him that way.You objected to my calling it OR but appear to have not found it useful to give my entire edit summary, which was:Hillary Clinton, a presidential candidate in the 2016 United States presidential election, spoke about Khan's service, describing him as one of fourteen Muslim Americans who had died in the service of the United States since the September 11 attacks.
Here is what the source says, which you removed:rephrasing removing original research, in the supplied quote it only says that Clinton gave a tribute, not that she described him as a muslim, that is a summary by Timsit not Clinton. If Clinton did this too a clearer source is needed.
The source only supports that Clinton gave a tribute to Humayun. It does not support her describing her as a muslim or one of 14 muslims. You point out this in the source:In Minneapolis in December 2015, Clinton gave a moving tribute to Humayun Khan, who was one of 14 American Muslims who died serving the United States in the 10 years after the September 11 terrorist attacks.
That description was not attributed to Hillary Clinton by the source. It is a description of Humayun given by the article's author, Annabelle Timsit.I believe the OR here is a misunderstanding: Timsit's description of Humayun is being wrongly attributed to Clinton.This source could support a separate statement like "Humayun is one of fourteen Muslim Americans who had died in the service of the United States since the September 11 attacks" but I do believe that regarding Hillary, that the statement should end at "spoke about Khan's service" because that is all the reference supports.@ Neutrality: it is fine to leave "1 in 14" so long as it is presented in proper context: research done by Annabelle Timsit, not a statement from Hillary Clinton. If Clinton DID say that in December, we would need to find another source supporting that, because this one doesn't. The phrasing does not present it as an observation made by Clinton, but as a description by Timsit, the article's author, telling readers about the person to whom Hillary made a tribute.I'm not eloquent and agree my statement seemed strange and stilting, but I only did so as I struggled to remain neutral in representing the source. If you can find a better way to phrase it without engaging in original research, I am open to that.Saying "described as Muslim" is more neutral than saying "was a Muslim". There are always reasons to doubt people's religions, as some people's religious presentation or description can vary depending on context. Unless we know that Humayun chose the design for his gravestone (what is the policy on that?) I don't think that shows anything. Even then we should say "Humayun chose the star and crescent to display on his tombstone", which is more neutral than simply assuming he was a Muslim because of that.The S&C is not exclusively a muslim symbol. According to our article on it "During the 1950s to 1960s, the symbol was re-interpreted as the symbol of Islam or the Muslim community" meaning that prior to that it had other uses.Consider for example, that Humayun is of Pakistani descent, and then view File:Flag_of_Pakistan.svg. The symbol on his gravestone could for example, be honoring the country of his family's background in Punjab (region), rather than his parents' religion. Ranze ( talk) 20:56, 14 August 2016 (UTC)who was one of 14 American Muslims who died serving the United States in the 10 years after the September 11 terrorist attacks
@ Cullen: this is a broader issue than just Humayun. If people besides a soldier are able to make the decision of what emblem to put on a headstone then we cannot use the emblem as a source supporting self-identification. Parents saying a child is of a religion should support "described as a Muslim by his parents". If media also does this "described by media as Muslim" is appropriate. If we find a statement by Humayun himself then that would support 'self-described Muslim' or similar.
Really any discussion of religious beliefs should be worded like this on any biography article, since beliefs are internal and cannot be objectively proven for anyone.
If we were to discuss "affiliation" rather than "belief" then I would not be splitting hairs, because affiliation can be done regardless of beliefs. For example if Humayun reported himself as a Muslim to the army (source?) or was registered at a Mosque. Ranze ( talk) 19:59, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
-- Carwil ( talk) 11:35, 21 August 2016 (UTC)But those numbers are only for service members who self-identified as Muslims. The Pentagon does not track recruits by faith. They only ask service members to declare their faith on their records so that in case of death, the department can provide the correct religious chaplain. [10]
The report doesn't specify which 4 ( or 14?) soldiers in Arlington are being talked about. So even though we know Humayun was buried there, we don't know if he is included in the "declared Islam as their faith" group based on that report. Ranze ( talk) 19:38, 22 August 2016 (UTC)At least 6,024 U.S. service members who declared Islam as their faith have served honorably in overseas war deployments since the 9/11 attacks, and 14 Muslim-American troops have been killed in action, all in Iraq, the Pentagon informed the Committee’s Majority Staff. We honor these American heroes, four of whom are buried in nearby Arlington National Cemetery, for making the ultimate sacrifice in service of our nation.
"is Michele Clock actually a reliable enough source...". It's not like we're citing her personal blog. The question is whether this source, written by Michele Clock, and published in the Washington Post, is a reliable source. And the answer is yes, certainly. If other reliable sources state something otherwise, that's one thing, but we can cross that bridge when we get to it (and a source that doesn't specify his religion is not such a source). If you don't think they should "dictate people's religion", they accept letters to the editor. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 20:05, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Ranze, this stuff is getting disruptive. Please stop trying to change text to change how the religion is presented without finding consensus here first. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 19:03, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Would something like this be public domain for us to be able to list or would it be classified? I am wondering if something like this is citeable or not for people who want to read the US Government's assessment of the events preceding Humayun's death to compare to other sources' accounts of it. Ranze ( talk) 04:02, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Has anyone attributed any direct quotes to him, be it friends or family or co-workers in the military? I am curious to read things said in his own words. We see this on some biography articles or they sometimes at least link to interviews. There are many people talking about him but not quoting him directly and I would like to know if anything like that exists. Ranze ( talk) 05:06, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Khizr's speech includes this accusation towards Trump:
"You have sacrificed nothing—and no one"
This implication of Humayun being 'sacrificed' by his father has received some criticism:
Becker, Jillian (2 August 2016). "The grief monger".
A Muslim, Khizr Kahn, spoke at the Democratic convention last week of his son's death in Iraq serving as a US soldier, implying that he, the father, has thus made a "sacrifice" .. By viewing his soldier son's death in combat as his "sacrifice", this father turns an honorable death – that of a soldier doing his job, fulfilling his promise, doing his duty – into a religious martyrdom.
Obviously there's no such thing as an unbiased source, Becker is open about being 'conservative'. The word "sacrifice" shows up in 2 titles referenced in the article, but not within the article itself.
This is also mentioned by Trump's opponent:
Zezima, Katie (31 July 2016). "Khizr Khan calls Trump a 'black soul' and says McConnell, Ryan have 'moral' obligation to repudiate him".
"Mr. Khan," Clinton said at a church in Cleveland, "paid the ultimate sacrifice in his family, didn't he. And what has he heard from Donald Trump?
At first I thought by "Mr. Khan" she might have been referring to Humayun but it's clear by "what has he heard" she's referring to Khizr, the Mr. Khan still able to hear.
Due to the recurring theme (Khizr using "sacrificed nothing" in his speech, Ghazala using "true sacrifice" in her article title, Hillary's quote) and the criticism of it by a notable authority like Becker, shouldn't discussion of this word be present in some form here? Ranze ( talk) 05:46, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Wouldn't this qualify it as an edited work? Reliable sources don't necessarily need to be pretty or fancy, don't they just need an editor/writer relationship? An editorial BOARD seems to qualify.Regarding the Bixby letter, I don't think it necessarily represents a secular presentation of the word. I understand how people could get that impression reading the excerpt "the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom" adapted to the Lady Columbia statue at Punchbowl Cemetery but reading the entire thing in context clearly associates it with religion:On our Editorial Board we have an economist and businessman (King’s College, Cambridge, and Stanford Business School); a lawyer (King’s College, Cambridge, and Yale Law School; member of the California bar); a soldier in the US army who is also our webmaster; a professional writer and former Director of the Institute for the Study of Terrorism (London).
"I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of Freedom."Religious or not, I think we should still talk about the context of the sacrifice, ie that some people rightly talk about it being Humayun's sacrifice (it was his choice to put his life at risk) while others talk about it being Khizr's sacrifice. Ranze ( talk) 19:17, 22 August 2016 (UTC)"I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of Freedom."
An act of giving up something valued for the sake of something else regarded as more important or worthy.Gold Star families are those whose fathers, mothers, sons and daughters have paid the ultimate price for freedom — the Khan family gave up their child for the sake of America's defense against terrorism. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 07:15, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
"By viewing his soldier son’s death in combat as his “sacrifice”, this father turns an honorable death – that of a soldier doing his job, fulfilling his promise, doing his duty – into a religious martyrdom.".:And then talking about suicide bombers? This is seriously what's being proposed to use a source? Lets not with this grasping at the right-wing blogosphere to add "has received criticism" bits into articles of these people with an absence of weight in reliable sources. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 20:15, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Re: "I am confused guys, is it 14 killed (4 buried in Arlington) as PDF says or 14 in Arlington as Wright says?"
By virtue of the non-overlapping dates, no one is counted on both these lists. The journalist reporting on Hillary Clinton's speech could have found either of these 14's (but more likely found the first one) and reported it as the overall total number of Muslim-American soldiers killed since 9/11.-- Carwil ( talk) 15:00, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Humayun Khan (soldier). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:41, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Humayun Khan (soldier) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
|
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If i had started the article, i'd have taken note that equal disambiguation is the default, and there must be a showing that, in this case, the diplomat or the war hero commands more than 50% of the public interest associated with the title. My prediction is that the soldier will soon eclipse the diplomat far beyond that, but the first step, whether or not i'm right, is to do equal dab for the time being. -- Jerzy• t 03:03, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
I've removed/reduced/reworded this content as I don't see how it's relevant or encyclopedic:
Humayun's father Khizr M. Khan, an immigration lawyer, discussed his son's achievements in 2005 with the Washington Post in 2005 and with Vocativ in 2015. Khan gave the Hillary Clinton campaign permission to use his words in a tribute given in December 2015.
I've kept the supporting references (not reprinted here), but this otherwise seems like barely relevant WP:TRIVIA to me. -- Kendrick7 talk 13:55, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
How are the comments of his father relevant? There is clearly a double standard at play. If Khizr Khan's attacks on Donald Trump are relevant to an article on Humayun Khan... then Patty Smith's attacks on Hillary Clinton are relevant to the article on Sean Smith. If Khizr Khan's comments are not removed here then I will add Patty Smith's comments to the corresponding article. This would include her comments at the RNC that Hillary Clinton lied to her face and that she holds Hillary Clinton personally responsible for the death of her son. If one set of comments is fair play then so is the other. 107.0.155.16 ( talk) 16:35, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Half of the content of this article is criticism of Donald Trump. Now people are trying to insert video of Khizr Khan criticizing Trump at the DNC. This is not the appropriate place for that content. Put it in the Khizr Khan page and mention that Humayun Khan is the son of immigration lawyer Khizr Khan... and be done with it. As far as I can tell there is zero direct relationship between Donald Trump and Humayun Khan. Put the father's criticism in the page on the father and link to that page. That content is not appropriate here. 107.0.155.16 ( talk) 21:04, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
http://shoebat.com/2016/08/02/hillary-is-busted-read-the-real-booklet-hillarys-man-was-carrying-for-years-it-was-the-muslim-shariah-constitution-and-not-the-u-s-constitution/ 71.182.237.125 ( talk) 23:58, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
This is a hot topic right now, but Capt Khan's father's statement of his son rushing a VIED while checking a guard tower and saving a chow hall full of hundreds of coalition personnel from harm is likely a fabrication. No media release prior to the DNC regarding Capt. Khan's death mentions such acts [1], [2] tell a very different story. 70.158.100.102 ( talk) 16:30, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Can we get the record corrected on this matter? I find it very doubtful that an army Captain would jump from a protected watchtower equipped with a machinegun to defeat a speeding vehicle with only his personal duty weapon. Also MASH is not a credible source. It is common knowledge to not place a DFAC (or mess hall) near an entry control point of base perimeter. 173.216.3.186 ( talk) 19:06, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
I have removed this category from the article, because the established description of the category says, "This category includes articles of people who are Muslim (followers of the religion of Islam) from Pakistan." He was not "from Pakistan" but rather his parents are. He was born in the United Arab Emirates. This category is not correct for this biography in my opinion. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:18, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
The Man is only American in a national way. Jack Morales Garcia ( talk) 20:58, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
What is the earliest source we can find saying that he was a Muslim? Can we find one that existed prior to July 29? He died in June 2004 so there's 12 years worth of news reports that could have mentioned it, I'll start looking. Given that many recent reports are calling him a 'muslim soldier' it would be interesting to know where and when this information came from. For example if there are statements from the soldier himself before his death, or any official registrations with a champlain.
edit: Okay I found one from a report when he was buried about a week after death:
Clock, Michele (16 June 2004). "A 'Peacemaker' Is Laid to Rest - Muslim Soldier From Prince William Tried to Improve Relations in Iraq". Washington Post. Archived from the original on 11 August 2016.
Family members and friends -- including Khan's girlfriend, Irene Auer, 24, of Amberg, Germany -- have filled the Khans' Bristow home in the past week, weeping and praying for the Muslim soldier they will remember as helping to build a bridge between the American and Iraqi people.{{ cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) ( help)
I'm still curious if we can find any pre-death sources though. Like for example where did Clock get the information: was it from parents? girlfriend? Military officers? Knowing the context is generally a useful thing since sometimes different people can have different opinions about what a person's religious status is. Ranze ( talk) 06:15, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
I still believe I am accurate in calling that original research.I am not saying it is OR that 14 Muslim-Americans died in service, but rather, that Hillary described him that way.You objected to my calling it OR but appear to have not found it useful to give my entire edit summary, which was:Hillary Clinton, a presidential candidate in the 2016 United States presidential election, spoke about Khan's service, describing him as one of fourteen Muslim Americans who had died in the service of the United States since the September 11 attacks.
Here is what the source says, which you removed:rephrasing removing original research, in the supplied quote it only says that Clinton gave a tribute, not that she described him as a muslim, that is a summary by Timsit not Clinton. If Clinton did this too a clearer source is needed.
The source only supports that Clinton gave a tribute to Humayun. It does not support her describing her as a muslim or one of 14 muslims. You point out this in the source:In Minneapolis in December 2015, Clinton gave a moving tribute to Humayun Khan, who was one of 14 American Muslims who died serving the United States in the 10 years after the September 11 terrorist attacks.
That description was not attributed to Hillary Clinton by the source. It is a description of Humayun given by the article's author, Annabelle Timsit.I believe the OR here is a misunderstanding: Timsit's description of Humayun is being wrongly attributed to Clinton.This source could support a separate statement like "Humayun is one of fourteen Muslim Americans who had died in the service of the United States since the September 11 attacks" but I do believe that regarding Hillary, that the statement should end at "spoke about Khan's service" because that is all the reference supports.@ Neutrality: it is fine to leave "1 in 14" so long as it is presented in proper context: research done by Annabelle Timsit, not a statement from Hillary Clinton. If Clinton DID say that in December, we would need to find another source supporting that, because this one doesn't. The phrasing does not present it as an observation made by Clinton, but as a description by Timsit, the article's author, telling readers about the person to whom Hillary made a tribute.I'm not eloquent and agree my statement seemed strange and stilting, but I only did so as I struggled to remain neutral in representing the source. If you can find a better way to phrase it without engaging in original research, I am open to that.Saying "described as Muslim" is more neutral than saying "was a Muslim". There are always reasons to doubt people's religions, as some people's religious presentation or description can vary depending on context. Unless we know that Humayun chose the design for his gravestone (what is the policy on that?) I don't think that shows anything. Even then we should say "Humayun chose the star and crescent to display on his tombstone", which is more neutral than simply assuming he was a Muslim because of that.The S&C is not exclusively a muslim symbol. According to our article on it "During the 1950s to 1960s, the symbol was re-interpreted as the symbol of Islam or the Muslim community" meaning that prior to that it had other uses.Consider for example, that Humayun is of Pakistani descent, and then view File:Flag_of_Pakistan.svg. The symbol on his gravestone could for example, be honoring the country of his family's background in Punjab (region), rather than his parents' religion. Ranze ( talk) 20:56, 14 August 2016 (UTC)who was one of 14 American Muslims who died serving the United States in the 10 years after the September 11 terrorist attacks
@ Cullen: this is a broader issue than just Humayun. If people besides a soldier are able to make the decision of what emblem to put on a headstone then we cannot use the emblem as a source supporting self-identification. Parents saying a child is of a religion should support "described as a Muslim by his parents". If media also does this "described by media as Muslim" is appropriate. If we find a statement by Humayun himself then that would support 'self-described Muslim' or similar.
Really any discussion of religious beliefs should be worded like this on any biography article, since beliefs are internal and cannot be objectively proven for anyone.
If we were to discuss "affiliation" rather than "belief" then I would not be splitting hairs, because affiliation can be done regardless of beliefs. For example if Humayun reported himself as a Muslim to the army (source?) or was registered at a Mosque. Ranze ( talk) 19:59, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
-- Carwil ( talk) 11:35, 21 August 2016 (UTC)But those numbers are only for service members who self-identified as Muslims. The Pentagon does not track recruits by faith. They only ask service members to declare their faith on their records so that in case of death, the department can provide the correct religious chaplain. [10]
The report doesn't specify which 4 ( or 14?) soldiers in Arlington are being talked about. So even though we know Humayun was buried there, we don't know if he is included in the "declared Islam as their faith" group based on that report. Ranze ( talk) 19:38, 22 August 2016 (UTC)At least 6,024 U.S. service members who declared Islam as their faith have served honorably in overseas war deployments since the 9/11 attacks, and 14 Muslim-American troops have been killed in action, all in Iraq, the Pentagon informed the Committee’s Majority Staff. We honor these American heroes, four of whom are buried in nearby Arlington National Cemetery, for making the ultimate sacrifice in service of our nation.
"is Michele Clock actually a reliable enough source...". It's not like we're citing her personal blog. The question is whether this source, written by Michele Clock, and published in the Washington Post, is a reliable source. And the answer is yes, certainly. If other reliable sources state something otherwise, that's one thing, but we can cross that bridge when we get to it (and a source that doesn't specify his religion is not such a source). If you don't think they should "dictate people's religion", they accept letters to the editor. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 20:05, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Ranze, this stuff is getting disruptive. Please stop trying to change text to change how the religion is presented without finding consensus here first. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 19:03, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Would something like this be public domain for us to be able to list or would it be classified? I am wondering if something like this is citeable or not for people who want to read the US Government's assessment of the events preceding Humayun's death to compare to other sources' accounts of it. Ranze ( talk) 04:02, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Has anyone attributed any direct quotes to him, be it friends or family or co-workers in the military? I am curious to read things said in his own words. We see this on some biography articles or they sometimes at least link to interviews. There are many people talking about him but not quoting him directly and I would like to know if anything like that exists. Ranze ( talk) 05:06, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Khizr's speech includes this accusation towards Trump:
"You have sacrificed nothing—and no one"
This implication of Humayun being 'sacrificed' by his father has received some criticism:
Becker, Jillian (2 August 2016). "The grief monger".
A Muslim, Khizr Kahn, spoke at the Democratic convention last week of his son's death in Iraq serving as a US soldier, implying that he, the father, has thus made a "sacrifice" .. By viewing his soldier son's death in combat as his "sacrifice", this father turns an honorable death – that of a soldier doing his job, fulfilling his promise, doing his duty – into a religious martyrdom.
Obviously there's no such thing as an unbiased source, Becker is open about being 'conservative'. The word "sacrifice" shows up in 2 titles referenced in the article, but not within the article itself.
This is also mentioned by Trump's opponent:
Zezima, Katie (31 July 2016). "Khizr Khan calls Trump a 'black soul' and says McConnell, Ryan have 'moral' obligation to repudiate him".
"Mr. Khan," Clinton said at a church in Cleveland, "paid the ultimate sacrifice in his family, didn't he. And what has he heard from Donald Trump?
At first I thought by "Mr. Khan" she might have been referring to Humayun but it's clear by "what has he heard" she's referring to Khizr, the Mr. Khan still able to hear.
Due to the recurring theme (Khizr using "sacrificed nothing" in his speech, Ghazala using "true sacrifice" in her article title, Hillary's quote) and the criticism of it by a notable authority like Becker, shouldn't discussion of this word be present in some form here? Ranze ( talk) 05:46, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Wouldn't this qualify it as an edited work? Reliable sources don't necessarily need to be pretty or fancy, don't they just need an editor/writer relationship? An editorial BOARD seems to qualify.Regarding the Bixby letter, I don't think it necessarily represents a secular presentation of the word. I understand how people could get that impression reading the excerpt "the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom" adapted to the Lady Columbia statue at Punchbowl Cemetery but reading the entire thing in context clearly associates it with religion:On our Editorial Board we have an economist and businessman (King’s College, Cambridge, and Stanford Business School); a lawyer (King’s College, Cambridge, and Yale Law School; member of the California bar); a soldier in the US army who is also our webmaster; a professional writer and former Director of the Institute for the Study of Terrorism (London).
"I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of Freedom."Religious or not, I think we should still talk about the context of the sacrifice, ie that some people rightly talk about it being Humayun's sacrifice (it was his choice to put his life at risk) while others talk about it being Khizr's sacrifice. Ranze ( talk) 19:17, 22 August 2016 (UTC)"I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of Freedom."
An act of giving up something valued for the sake of something else regarded as more important or worthy.Gold Star families are those whose fathers, mothers, sons and daughters have paid the ultimate price for freedom — the Khan family gave up their child for the sake of America's defense against terrorism. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 07:15, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
"By viewing his soldier son’s death in combat as his “sacrifice”, this father turns an honorable death – that of a soldier doing his job, fulfilling his promise, doing his duty – into a religious martyrdom.".:And then talking about suicide bombers? This is seriously what's being proposed to use a source? Lets not with this grasping at the right-wing blogosphere to add "has received criticism" bits into articles of these people with an absence of weight in reliable sources. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 20:15, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Re: "I am confused guys, is it 14 killed (4 buried in Arlington) as PDF says or 14 in Arlington as Wright says?"
By virtue of the non-overlapping dates, no one is counted on both these lists. The journalist reporting on Hillary Clinton's speech could have found either of these 14's (but more likely found the first one) and reported it as the overall total number of Muslim-American soldiers killed since 9/11.-- Carwil ( talk) 15:00, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Humayun Khan (soldier). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:41, 8 November 2017 (UTC)